Influence of acute dietary nitrate supplementation on oxygen delivery/consumption and critical impulse during maximal effort forearm exercise in males: a randomized crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beetroot juice supplementation (BRJ) should increase nitric oxide bioavailability under conditions of muscle deoxygenation and acidosis that are a normal consequence of the maximal effort exercise test used to identify forearm critical impulse. We hypothesized BRJ would improve oxygen delivery:demand matching and forearm critical impulse performance. Healthy males (20.8 ± 2.4 years) participated in a randomized crossover trial between October 2017 and May 2018 (Queen’s University, Kingston, ON). Participants completed 10 min of rhythmic maximal effort forearm handgrip exercise 2.5 h post placebo (PL) vs. BRJ (9 completed PL/BRJ vs. 4 completed BRJ/PL) within a 2 week period. Data are presented as mean ± SD. There was a main effect of drink (PL > BRJ) for oxygen extraction ( P = 0.033, ηp2 = 0.351) and oxygen consumption/force ( P = 0.017, ηp2 = 0.417). There was a drink × time interaction (PL > BRJ) for oxygen consumption/force ( P = 0.035, ηp2 = 0.216) between 75 and 360 s (1.25–6 min) from exercise onset. BRJ did not influence oxygen delivery ( P = 0.953, ηp2 = 0.000), oxygen consumption ( P = 0.064, ηp2 = 0.278), metabolites ((lactate) ( P = 0.196, ηp2 = 0.135), pH ( P = 0.759, ηp2 = 0.008)) or power-duration performance parameters (critical impulse ( P = 0.379, d = 0.253), W′ ( P = 0.733, d = 0.097)). BRJ during all-out handgrip exercise does not influence oxygen delivery or exercise performance. Oxygen cost of contraction with BRJ is reduced as contraction impulse is declining during maximal effort exercise resulting in less oxygen extraction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".